This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix wchar_t breakage on Solaris
- From: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at libertysurf dot fr>
- To: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at suse dot de>
- Cc: libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 20:59:41 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix wchar_t breakage on Solaris
- References: <200603312306.37523.ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr> <442E9E3D.1030205@suse.de> <443FAE9F.9020108@suse.de>
Hi Paolo,
> The below is a complete, consistent solution, the best I could come up
> with.
Thanks for taking care of doing this!
> So far, all my tests are fine on x86-linux, help for Solaris would be
> much appreciated Eric!
Here are the results for mainline on SPARC:
Solaris 10:
=== libstdc++ tests ===
Running target unix
XPASS: 27_io/basic_istream/extractors_arithmetic/char/12.cc execution test
XPASS: 27_io/basic_istream/extractors_arithmetic/wchar_t/12.cc execution test
=== libstdc++ Summary for unix ===
# of expected passes 3529
# of unexpected successes 2
# of expected failures 12
# of unsupported tests 321
Solaris 9:
=== libstdc++ tests ===
Running target unix
=== libstdc++ Summary ===
# of expected passes 3529
# of expected failures 14
# of unsupported tests 321
Solaris 8:
=== libstdc++ tests ===
Running target unix
=== libstdc++ Summary ===
# of expected passes 3529
# of expected failures 14
# of unsupported tests 321
Solaris 7:
=== libstdc++ tests ===
Running target unix
=== libstdc++ Summary ===
# of expected passes 3529
# of expected failures 14
# of unsupported tests 321
Solaris 2.6:
=== libstdc++ tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: 22_locale/ctype/is/char/1.cc execution test
FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/sgetn/char/1-in.cc execution test
FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/sgetn/char/1-io.cc execution test
FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/sgetn/char/2-in.cc execution test
FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/sgetn/char/2-io.cc execution test
FAIL: 27_io/basic_istream/readsome/char/6746-2.cc execution test
=== libstdc++ Summary ===
# of expected passes 2754
# of unexpected failures 6
# of expected failures 11
# of unsupported tests 151
The Solaris 2.6 results are nominal so the patch seems to work fine.
--
Eric Botcazou